You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Increased Carbon Levels are Not Causing Global Warming
Actually, we don't really understand all the causes of climate change. Science is in the infancy of understanding the dynamic climate patterns that we know occurred in the past, and CO2 can't explain. For all we know, CO2 emissions may be keeping us from entering another ice age, and until we can isolate the variables and understand all the conditions that cause our climate to drastically change in a geological instant, then anyone saying that more/less CO2 is needed is full of shit.
After 50 years of research you cannot claim climate change related research is still in it's infancy stage.
https://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-co2-enhanced-greenhouse-effect.htm
A world government would have an easier tool to get money. Print money and let inflation do the work.
CO2 greenhouse effect is just one in many factors driving climate change. We have hundreds of thousands of years of temperature records thanks to ice cores, and there have been numerous huge shifts in climate in Earth's history that CO2 doesn't begin to explain.
While everything you say is true (as far as I know at least), you still cannot say CO2 is not the leading cause of todays climate change
Btw, props to you for discussing in a nice and non-offensive way! Not sure this would have been possible on youtube :)
You also can't say that it is the leading source of climate change. It almost certainly is a major contributor based on the leading science, but you can't say global warming isn't bad for the long term well being of the planet or humanity, its an unfounded claim and the vast majority of climate change models have been extremely innacurate.
There are so many contributing variables, its like trying to predict the stock market, but you've gotta wait 100 years instead of a couple days to see if your model is correct, then you habe to refine your model and retest. We only have ONE sample to study or test, that's an insanely limited dataset. Imagine if we only had one person to study for medicine, how fast would it advance?
The popular claims about climate change science aren't even supported by the science, they're just myths and untested hypotheses floating around culture. People believe them because of tribalist peer pressure, "because science", because everyone wants to be perceived as smart, no one wants to be insulted.
It IS a propaganda tribalist movement, just look at the attacks on people who are so called "climate change deniers".
That's what happens when you collude with government. Churches, corporations, or science. Things get politicized, things get corrupted, it turns into propaganda to get a politician elected. The politician on the committee holding your paycheck over your head, favors get traded. The slightest bias for political favor is compounded over time, but when it grows big enough to notice, the corrupt have to admit their error, or pretend its not an error. Most people are good people, or they think they are, they try to be. The cognitive dissonance of the error and minor justifications obfuscate the obvious until they are blind. It happens in every context of human life, I might be doing it right now.
That's why when you see people attacking someone for having a different idea, voicing a different opinion, or just asking questions, that's cultural tribalism, its not rational, its not scientific, its very unlikely to be correct. Correct ideas are easily defensible, people who are willing to talk calm and civil, without acting perpetually irritated, those are usually the people who believe they are right, they're trying to be intellectually honest.
Last paragraph *that's intellectual tribalism
We now have emails and documents confirming that 3 of the biggest oil companies confirming they knew CO2 emissions cause climate change... that's all the proof I need.
Then you're gullible, and the reason society is the way it is today. Oil companies are involved in the whole scheme/scam.
We have emails and documents? Which ones, and where? Let me guess, anonymous source?
No anonymous sources, documentation from the law firms that are bringing the case against them... it's official documentation from their corporate correspondence. Look it up. No anonymous sources. But let me ask where are YOUR sources, there are none in your article, but thanks for insulting me and saying the world is the way it is because of people like me.